Regarding John McClaughry’s recent negative commentary in the Rutland Herald on Vermont’s Act 48, readers should keep the following in mind:

As the ideological guru and founder of the Ethan Allen Institute (EAI) Mr. McClaughry, along other members of EAI, will almost always favor any so-called “free market” business enterprise over a government-run program, including health care, regardless of the results. The results are that after decades, private sector heath insurance has failed to achieve anything close to universal, affordable, and accessible health care for all.

If it had, we wouldn’t need Act 48’s universal/single-payer plan, an anathema to Mr. McClaughry, who labels it as socialism because it’s a publicly funded, government-run program. If public funding, etc., were the criteria, then public schools, police and fire departments, infrastructure repairs, Medicare and Social Security would then also qualify as socialism.

Moreover, the private sector health care insurance system in the U.S. is not only the most expensive in the world by far, it also has poorer results than virtually all other advanced countries, including Canada. These countries consider universal health care as government’s responsibility to provide for its citizens. The U.K. under Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, who was as conservative as they come, never once considered scrapping Britain’s national health system for market-based health care.

Mr. McClaughry also seems to belittle Governor Shumlin’s idea that health care for all is a “right.” If so, who is to say that someone is not deserving of health care?